GA-7VRXP Memory problems

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

I'm having problems adding an extra 512MB of memory to my 256MB
GA-7VRXP W2K/W95 dual boot system and would appreciate some advice.

I've tried three different types of memory, two lots of PC2700 and now a
strip of PC2100 (Kingston branded). In each case the symptoms are the
same; The BIOS recognises the memory and POSTs, Windows starts loading,
crashes partway through the process and the machine restarts. This boot
loop would apparently continue forever if I don't interrupt it.

At first I suspected a HAL issue but W95 (which doesn't have one)
experiences the same symptoms. I've tried using the BIOS 'Failsafe
defaults'; I've tried using different slots - with and without the
original memory and I've tried upgrading the BIOS (F12 - very
unreliable, lots of blue screens, so backed out). In every case the
symptoms are pretty much the same. Either the CHKDSK crashes while
still counting down (always in the same place, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, bang!) or
occasionally, a BSOD ("PFN_list_corrupt",
"Driver_IRQL_not_less_or_equal", "KMODE_exception_not_handled" amongst a
selection) depending on the BIOS I'm using at the time.

On a couple of occasions I got the blue desktop background of a Windows
system starting up, but nothing happened (no "Loading Network Settings"
or "Security Settings" messages, keyboard and mouse apparently not
recognised) and I had to reboot.

I'm currently looking for a copy of the same brand as the original
memory (VData - found some on eBay); in the meantime, can anyone suggest
what might be going wrong? I'm puzzled because the board has been
thoroughly reliable since I originally built it.

--

Simon Elliott
24 answers Last reply
More about 7vrxp memory problems
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    I had the same problem with my GA-7VRXP when I bought it over 2 years ago.

    I had started off with1 module of 512MB generic PC2700. A few months later
    I decided to add another 512MB PC2700 module, also generic but different
    manufacturer. I began having the same problems that you are currently
    having. Each module would work fine by itself, but as soon as the second
    module was added, even using the most conservative BIOS memory settings, the
    problems started.

    Running memtest86 with each module by itself confirmed that there were no
    problems with either of the individual modules. After adding the second
    module and rerunning memtest86 confirmed that there were memory errors when
    both modules are used together.

    The solution was to bring both modules back to my vendor and exchange them,
    at no extra cost to me, for a pair of modules from the same manufacturer and
    same production lot. With the 2 new 512MB PC2700 modules together, running
    memtest86 for several cycles confirms that there are no more errors.

    This motherboard seems to be very sensitive to any mismatches in memory
    modules.

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1093512885.20592.0@sabbath.news.uk.clara.net...
    >
    > I'm having problems adding an extra 512MB of memory to my 256MB
    > GA-7VRXP W2K/W95 dual boot system and would appreciate some advice.
    >
    > I've tried three different types of memory, two lots of PC2700 and now a
    > strip of PC2100 (Kingston branded). In each case the symptoms are the
    > same; The BIOS recognises the memory and POSTs, Windows starts loading,
    > crashes partway through the process and the machine restarts. This boot
    > loop would apparently continue forever if I don't interrupt it.
    >
    > At first I suspected a HAL issue but W95 (which doesn't have one)
    > experiences the same symptoms. I've tried using the BIOS 'Failsafe
    > defaults'; I've tried using different slots - with and without the
    > original memory and I've tried upgrading the BIOS (F12 - very
    > unreliable, lots of blue screens, so backed out). In every case the
    > symptoms are pretty much the same. Either the CHKDSK crashes while
    > still counting down (always in the same place, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, bang!) or
    > occasionally, a BSOD ("PFN_list_corrupt",
    > "Driver_IRQL_not_less_or_equal", "KMODE_exception_not_handled" amongst a
    > selection) depending on the BIOS I'm using at the time.
    >
    > On a couple of occasions I got the blue desktop background of a Windows
    > system starting up, but nothing happened (no "Loading Network Settings"
    > or "Security Settings" messages, keyboard and mouse apparently not
    > recognised) and I had to reboot.
    >
    > I'm currently looking for a copy of the same brand as the original
    > memory (VData - found some on eBay); in the meantime, can anyone suggest
    > what might be going wrong? I'm puzzled because the board has been
    > thoroughly reliable since I originally built it.
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon Elliott
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >I had the same problem with my GA-7VRXP when I bought it over 2 years ago.
    >
    >I had started off with1 module of 512MB generic PC2700. A few months later
    >I decided to add another 512MB PC2700 module, also generic but different
    >manufacturer. I began having the same problems that you are currently
    >having. Each module would work fine by itself, but as soon as the second
    >module was added, even using the most conservative BIOS memory settings, the
    >problems started.
    >
    >Running memtest86 with each module by itself confirmed that there were no
    >problems with either of the individual modules. After adding the second
    >module and rerunning memtest86 confirmed that there were memory errors when
    >both modules are used together.
    >
    >The solution was to bring both modules back to my vendor and exchange them,
    >at no extra cost to me, for a pair of modules from the same manufacturer and
    >same production lot. With the 2 new 512MB PC2700 modules together, running
    >memtest86 for several cycles confirms that there are no more errors.
    >
    >This motherboard seems to be very sensitive to any mismatches in memory
    >modules.
    >
    >
    >
    Thanks for the info Homer.

    From my experience I would agree that the 7VRXP is unusually sensitive
    to the memory installed. In my case I can't get it to recognise anything
    other than the original memory, none of the new sticks I've tried
    (including a stick of Kingston brand) have worked and I'm surprised I
    ever managed to get the board working in the first place.

    I'm currently looking for something matching the original memory and
    hope to have some success with eBay.

    In your case, what revision board do you have and what BIOS version were
    you running at the time (if you can remember)? Is there a BIOS version
    that's as stable as the F4 I'm currently running that might be
    successful, the F12 I tried was useless?

    Thanks again for your contribution. I've spent two weeks, on and off,
    trying to get the board to accept some extra memory and it's good to
    hear that it's not me doing something wrong - this board is very sensitive.


    --

    Simon
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    My board is Rev. 2.0, with BIOS F12.

    I know that the Rev 1.1 and earlier boards were very problematic with
    certain highend video cards (GeForce4's at that time) and PC2700 RAM.

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1093598758.3960.0@dyke.uk.clara.net...
    > Homer J. Simpson wrote:
    >
    > >I had the same problem with my GA-7VRXP when I bought it over 2 years
    ago.
    > >
    > >I had started off with1 module of 512MB generic PC2700. A few months
    later
    > >I decided to add another 512MB PC2700 module, also generic but different
    > >manufacturer. I began having the same problems that you are currently
    > >having. Each module would work fine by itself, but as soon as the second
    > >module was added, even using the most conservative BIOS memory settings,
    the
    > >problems started.
    > >
    > >Running memtest86 with each module by itself confirmed that there were no
    > >problems with either of the individual modules. After adding the second
    > >module and rerunning memtest86 confirmed that there were memory errors
    when
    > >both modules are used together.
    > >
    > >The solution was to bring both modules back to my vendor and exchange
    them,
    > >at no extra cost to me, for a pair of modules from the same manufacturer
    and
    > >same production lot. With the 2 new 512MB PC2700 modules together,
    running
    > >memtest86 for several cycles confirms that there are no more errors.
    > >
    > >This motherboard seems to be very sensitive to any mismatches in memory
    > >modules.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > Thanks for the info Homer.
    >
    > From my experience I would agree that the 7VRXP is unusually sensitive
    > to the memory installed. In my case I can't get it to recognise anything
    > other than the original memory, none of the new sticks I've tried
    > (including a stick of Kingston brand) have worked and I'm surprised I
    > ever managed to get the board working in the first place.
    >
    > I'm currently looking for something matching the original memory and
    > hope to have some success with eBay.
    >
    > In your case, what revision board do you have and what BIOS version were
    > you running at the time (if you can remember)? Is there a BIOS version
    > that's as stable as the F4 I'm currently running that might be
    > successful, the F12 I tried was useless?
    >
    > Thanks again for your contribution. I've spent two weeks, on and off,
    > trying to get the board to accept some extra memory and it's good to
    > hear that it's not me doing something wrong - this board is very
    sensitive.
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >My board is Rev. 2.0, with BIOS F12.
    >
    >I know that the Rev 1.1 and earlier boards were very problematic with
    >certain highend video cards (GeForce4's at that time) and PC2700 RAM.
    >
    >
    >
    Thanks Homer.

    My board is Rev 1.1 and I'm currently using F4, I found F12 too
    unreliable to use.

    Goes to show you shouldn't believe everything you hear. My recently
    purchased GeForce FX 5200 installed sweetly and has been rock solid in use.

    Do you have any tips I could use to try and get this PC2100 working?


    --

    Simon
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Hi, Simon.

    Try the following manual memory settings, instead of letting the motherboard
    read the memory timings from the SPD ROM on the memory modules:

    In the Chipset Features Setup page of the BIOS Setup try the following
    conservative memory settings...

    Top Performance :Disabled
    Fast Command :Normal
    Configure SDRAM by SPD :Disabled
    SDRAM Frequency :266MHz
    SDRAM CAS# Latency :2.5
    SDRAM Command Rate :2T Command

    If you are able to get to the hidden settings by pressing <Ctrl> <F1> at the
    main BIOS menu page and then going into the Chipset Features Setup page then
    also try the following memory settings...

    Precharge to Active CMD :3T
    Active CMD to Precharge :7T
    Active to CMD :3T
    SDRAM Bank Interleave :Disabled
    SDRAM Burst Length :4 QW
    ClkGen for DDR/PCI Slots :Enabled

    The above memory settings should be more conservative than the Fail-Safe
    Values.

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1093619799.15409.0@nnrp-t71-02.news.clara.net...
    > Homer J. Simpson wrote:
    >
    > >My board is Rev. 2.0, with BIOS F12.
    > >
    > >I know that the Rev 1.1 and earlier boards were very problematic with
    > >certain highend video cards (GeForce4's at that time) and PC2700 RAM.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > Thanks Homer.
    >
    > My board is Rev 1.1 and I'm currently using F4, I found F12 too
    > unreliable to use.
    >
    > Goes to show you shouldn't believe everything you hear. My recently
    > purchased GeForce FX 5200 installed sweetly and has been rock solid in
    use.
    >
    > Do you have any tips I could use to try and get this PC2100 working?
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >Hi, Simon.
    >
    >Try the following manual memory settings, instead of letting the motherboard
    >read the memory timings from the SPD ROM on the memory modules:
    >
    >In the Chipset Features Setup page of the BIOS Setup try the following
    >conservative memory settings...
    >
    >Top Performance :Disabled
    >Fast Command :Normal
    >Configure SDRAM by SPD :Disabled
    >SDRAM Frequency :266MHz
    >SDRAM CAS# Latency :2.5
    >SDRAM Command Rate :2T Command
    >
    >If you are able to get to the hidden settings by pressing <Ctrl> <F1> at the
    >main BIOS menu page and then going into the Chipset Features Setup page then
    >also try the following memory settings...
    >
    >Precharge to Active CMD :3T
    >Active CMD to Precharge :7T
    >Active to CMD :3T
    >SDRAM Bank Interleave :Disabled
    >SDRAM Burst Length :4 QW
    >ClkGen for DDR/PCI Slots :Enabled
    >
    >The above memory settings should be more conservative than the Fail-Safe
    >Values.
    >
    >
    >
    Thanks Homer.

    I'll have a try with those and let you know how I get on.

    --

    Simon
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >
    >> Hi, Simon.
    >>
    >> Try the following manual memory settings, instead of letting the
    >> motherboard
    >> read the memory timings from the SPD ROM on the memory modules:
    >>
    >> In the Chipset Features Setup page of the BIOS Setup try the following
    >> conservative memory settings...
    >>
    >> Top Performance :Disabled
    >> Fast Command :Normal
    >> Configure SDRAM by SPD :Disabled
    >> SDRAM Frequency :266MHz
    >> SDRAM CAS# Latency :2.5
    >> SDRAM Command Rate :2T Command
    >>
    >> If you are able to get to the hidden settings by pressing <Ctrl> <F1>
    >> at the
    >> main BIOS menu page and then going into the Chipset Features Setup
    >> page then
    >> also try the following memory settings...
    >>
    >> Precharge to Active CMD :3T
    >> Active CMD to Precharge :7T
    >> Active to CMD :3T
    >> SDRAM Bank Interleave :Disabled
    >> SDRAM Burst Length :4 QW
    >> ClkGen for DDR/PCI Slots :Enabled
    >>
    >> The above memory settings should be more conservative than the Fail-Safe
    >> Values.
    >>
    >>
    >
    Hi Homer

    Followed your suggestions, but no success.

    I tried using the Chipset settings you suggested but couldn't find the
    'hidden settings' to change those. CTL+F1 does nothing on my board and
    I'm wondering if this something that came in with either the Rev 2.0
    board or just a later version of the BIOS (currently F4)? I've looked
    but cannot find this info on the Gigabyte website.

    I'm currently awaiting the end of an Bay auction to see if I can get my
    hands on a stick similar to my original memory. If not then I'll try
    Crucial, given they seem to have a money back guarantee.

    --

    Simon
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Hi, Simon.

    Do you know if your Rev. 1.1 board has the voltage regulation problem fixed?
    A couple of years ago owners of the Rev. 1.1 boards RMA'd them and Gigabyte
    repaired them and sent it back to them. The repair, if I remember
    correctly, was the addition of a 4.7uF 30V tantalum capacitor on one leg of
    a voltage regulator MOSFET next to the NB_FAN header.

    Prior to the voltage regulation fix being available from Gigabyte some were
    raising the AGP Voltage, DDR Voltage or VCore Voltage to get enough voltage
    to the video card, memory modules or CPU respectively. This wasn't always
    successful.

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1093779413.13798.0@nnrp-t71-02.news.clara.net...
    > Homer J. Simpson wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >> Hi, Simon.
    > >>
    > >> Try the following manual memory settings, instead of letting the
    > >> motherboard
    > >> read the memory timings from the SPD ROM on the memory modules:
    > >>
    > >> In the Chipset Features Setup page of the BIOS Setup try the following
    > >> conservative memory settings...
    > >>
    > >> Top Performance :Disabled
    > >> Fast Command :Normal
    > >> Configure SDRAM by SPD :Disabled
    > >> SDRAM Frequency :266MHz
    > >> SDRAM CAS# Latency :2.5
    > >> SDRAM Command Rate :2T Command
    > >>
    > >> If you are able to get to the hidden settings by pressing <Ctrl> <F1>
    > >> at the
    > >> main BIOS menu page and then going into the Chipset Features Setup
    > >> page then
    > >> also try the following memory settings...
    > >>
    > >> Precharge to Active CMD :3T
    > >> Active CMD to Precharge :7T
    > >> Active to CMD :3T
    > >> SDRAM Bank Interleave :Disabled
    > >> SDRAM Burst Length :4 QW
    > >> ClkGen for DDR/PCI Slots :Enabled
    > >>
    > >> The above memory settings should be more conservative than the
    Fail-Safe
    > >> Values.
    > >>
    > >>
    > >
    > Hi Homer
    >
    > Followed your suggestions, but no success.
    >
    > I tried using the Chipset settings you suggested but couldn't find the
    > 'hidden settings' to change those. CTL+F1 does nothing on my board and
    > I'm wondering if this something that came in with either the Rev 2.0
    > board or just a later version of the BIOS (currently F4)? I've looked
    > but cannot find this info on the Gigabyte website.
    >
    > I'm currently awaiting the end of an Bay auction to see if I can get my
    > hands on a stick similar to my original memory. If not then I'll try
    > Crucial, given they seem to have a money back guarantee.
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >Hi, Simon.
    >
    >Do you know if your Rev. 1.1 board has the voltage regulation problem fixed?
    >A couple of years ago owners of the Rev. 1.1 boards RMA'd them and Gigabyte
    >repaired them and sent it back to them. The repair, if I remember
    >correctly, was the addition of a 4.7uF 30V tantalum capacitor on one leg of
    >a voltage regulator MOSFET next to the NB_FAN header.
    >
    >Prior to the voltage regulation fix being available from Gigabyte some were
    >raising the AGP Voltage, DDR Voltage or VCore Voltage to get enough voltage
    >to the video card, memory modules or CPU respectively. This wasn't always
    >successful.
    >
    >"Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    >news:1093779413.13798.0@nnrp-t71-02.news.clara.net...
    >
    >
    Good question Homer. Honest answer, don't know.

    To my knowledge the board has never been RMA'd. I bought it new from a
    fair a couple of years ago, as the basis of my current box. It's not
    clocked but has worked quite happily with the optimum settings

    I can find the NB_FAN socket but don't know what a voltage regulator
    MOSFET looks like. Is it one of several chip-like things running down
    the left hand side of the socket? I can't see anything that looks like
    an extra capacitor. As you can guess, I'm working at the limits of my
    knowledge here.

    Thanks for taking the time to help me. BTW, hows Midge? :-)

    --

    Simon
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Hi, Simon.

    Here's a link to a page with pictures of the fix...

    http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/hoodspages/cap_mod.htm

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1093870804.17238.0@spandrell.news.uk.clara.net...
    > Homer J. Simpson wrote:
    >
    > >Hi, Simon.
    > >
    > >Do you know if your Rev. 1.1 board has the voltage regulation problem
    fixed?
    > >A couple of years ago owners of the Rev. 1.1 boards RMA'd them and
    Gigabyte
    > >repaired them and sent it back to them. The repair, if I remember
    > >correctly, was the addition of a 4.7uF 30V tantalum capacitor on one leg
    of
    > >a voltage regulator MOSFET next to the NB_FAN header.
    > >
    > >Prior to the voltage regulation fix being available from Gigabyte some
    were
    > >raising the AGP Voltage, DDR Voltage or VCore Voltage to get enough
    voltage
    > >to the video card, memory modules or CPU respectively. This wasn't
    always
    > >successful.
    > >
    > >"Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    > >news:1093779413.13798.0@nnrp-t71-02.news.clara.net...
    > >
    > >
    > Good question Homer. Honest answer, don't know.
    >
    > To my knowledge the board has never been RMA'd. I bought it new from a
    > fair a couple of years ago, as the basis of my current box. It's not
    > clocked but has worked quite happily with the optimum settings
    >
    > I can find the NB_FAN socket but don't know what a voltage regulator
    > MOSFET looks like. Is it one of several chip-like things running down
    > the left hand side of the socket? I can't see anything that looks like
    > an extra capacitor. As you can guess, I'm working at the limits of my
    > knowledge here.
    >
    > Thanks for taking the time to help me. BTW, hows Midge? :-)
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >Hi, Simon.
    >
    >Here's a link to a page with pictures of the fix...
    >
    >http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/hoodspages/cap_mod.htm
    >
    >
    >
    I see what you're talking about and no, I don't have the fix. The board
    is two years old, therefore too old to be RMA'd and this kind of work is
    beyond me; so it sounds like something I'm going to have try and work
    around.

    Based on this and the information from your previous posting, I'm
    guessing that my problem is a voltage issue. Presumably the three
    different sticks I've tried have all been affected as a result. My
    current hypothesis is that I might have some success using another 256MB
    stick (complementing the one already in place), instead of 512MB and I'm
    off in a minute to make the swap.

    Your previous posting refers to "raising the .. DDR Voltage ... to get
    enough voltage to the ... memory modules". If I find that the 256MB
    doesn't work alongside my original (effectively meaning I can't add any
    extra memory) then this increase is something I might consider. Can you
    offer any advice about what sort of increments should I be trying and
    anything else I should be aware of to avoid making a costly mistake?

    Thank you again for your ongoing help.

    --

    Simon
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    The default DDR Voltage is 2.5V. The increments are by 0.1V. The maximum
    DDR Voltage that you can select is 2.8V. This means that you have 3
    different voltages that you can try.

    If none of the DDR Voltage changes works, try raising the VCore Voltage to
    +5.0%. You may have to try various combinations of DDR and VCore voltages.

    Check your system's voltage status in the Hardware Monitor & Misc Setup BIOS
    setup page and post them here.

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1093944590.16817.0@ersa.uk.clara.net...
    > Homer J. Simpson wrote:
    >
    > >Hi, Simon.
    > >
    > >Here's a link to a page with pictures of the fix...
    > >
    > >http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/hoodspages/cap_mod.htm
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > I see what you're talking about and no, I don't have the fix. The board
    > is two years old, therefore too old to be RMA'd and this kind of work is
    > beyond me; so it sounds like something I'm going to have try and work
    > around.
    >
    > Based on this and the information from your previous posting, I'm
    > guessing that my problem is a voltage issue. Presumably the three
    > different sticks I've tried have all been affected as a result. My
    > current hypothesis is that I might have some success using another 256MB
    > stick (complementing the one already in place), instead of 512MB and I'm
    > off in a minute to make the swap.
    >
    > Your previous posting refers to "raising the .. DDR Voltage ... to get
    > enough voltage to the ... memory modules". If I find that the 256MB
    > doesn't work alongside my original (effectively meaning I can't add any
    > extra memory) then this increase is something I might consider. Can you
    > offer any advice about what sort of increments should I be trying and
    > anything else I should be aware of to avoid making a costly mistake?
    >
    > Thank you again for your ongoing help.
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Simon Elliott wrote:

    > I'm guessing that my problem is a voltage issue. Presumably the three
    > different sticks I've tried have all been affected as a result. My
    > current hypothesis is that I might have some success using another
    > 256MB stick (complementing the one already in place), instead of 512MB
    > and I'm off in a minute to make the swap.
    >
    And what do you know? It works.

    Swapped the 512MB for 256MB (also Kingston brand) and the computer boots
    without a problem. In my case 2 x 256MB works where 1 x 512MB doesn't.

    I can only conclude that Homer was on the right track, there is a
    voltage issue with my board and that a 256MB stick is compatible, where
    a 512MB stick isn't. I'm currently waiting on eBay, but I might be
    getting a third 256MB stick and now I'm quietly optimistic that this one
    will work as well.

    Thanks again Homer for your help.

    --

    Simon
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >The default DDR Voltage is 2.5V. The increments are by 0.1V. The maximum
    >DDR Voltage that you can select is 2.8V. This means that you have 3
    >different voltages that you can try.
    >
    >If none of the DDR Voltage changes works, try raising the VCore Voltage to
    >+5.0%. You may have to try various combinations of DDR and VCore voltages.
    >
    >Check your system's voltage status in the Hardware Monitor & Misc Setup BIOS
    >setup page and post them here.
    >
    >"Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    >news:1093944590.16817.0@ersa.uk.clara.net...
    >
    >
    Thanks for the tips Homer.

    I'd bought the extra memory because I was experiencing an occasional
    'hiccup' in normal operation. If I had several applications running and
    swapped between them quickly then the computer would hang for a couple
    of seconds, CDs or radio would 'stutter' and then normal operation
    would resume.

    I attributed this to a memory bottleneck and time spent accessing the
    swap file. Since I added the extra 256MB I've not experienced the
    problem (fingers crossed).

    So I'm happy with what I've now got and don't intend (in the near
    future) to be adding any more memory; particularly if it's greater than
    a 256MB stick.

    So I've saved your previous posting for future reference and here's my
    BIOS readings for academic interest.

    AGP Voltage: 1.5V
    DDR Voltage: 2.5V
    Vcore Voltage: Normal
    CPU Host Clock: (Mhz): 133
    ---
    VCore: +1.728V
    VTT: +1.184V
    +3.300V: +3.264V
    +5.000V: +4.865V
    +12.000V: +12.224V
    5VSB +5.886V

    Thanks again for your help.

    --

    Simon
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Your Vtt (memory termination voltage) at +1.184 V is low by more than 5%.
    It is suppose to be ½ of the DDR Voltage (i.e. 1.25V). The Vtt on my Rev. 2
    board is +1.248 V, which is low by 0.16%.

    Too bad you didn't post the Vtt for the 512MB stick(s) when you tried them.
    It most likely would have been lower than +1.184 V. This would definitely
    point to a voltage regulation problem that needs to be fixed.

    If you would have raised the DDR Voltage, with the 512MB stick(s) you've
    tried, you probably would have been able to use it.

    If you know someone who is an electronics hobbyist and can obtain and solder
    that capacitor to your board, that would be the ultimate solution.

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1094024254.8248.0@lotis.uk.clara.net...
    > Homer J. Simpson wrote:
    >
    >>The default DDR Voltage is 2.5V. The increments are by 0.1V. The maximum
    >>DDR Voltage that you can select is 2.8V. This means that you have 3
    >>different voltages that you can try.
    >>
    >>If none of the DDR Voltage changes works, try raising the VCore Voltage to
    >>+5.0%. You may have to try various combinations of DDR and VCore
    >>voltages.
    >>
    >>Check your system's voltage status in the Hardware Monitor & Misc Setup
    >>BIOS
    >>setup page and post them here.
    >>
    >>"Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    >>news:1093944590.16817.0@ersa.uk.clara.net...
    >>
    > Thanks for the tips Homer.
    >
    > I'd bought the extra memory because I was experiencing an occasional
    > 'hiccup' in normal operation. If I had several applications running and
    > swapped between them quickly then the computer would hang for a couple of
    > seconds, CDs or radio would 'stutter' and then normal operation would
    > resume.
    >
    > I attributed this to a memory bottleneck and time spent accessing the swap
    > file. Since I added the extra 256MB I've not experienced the problem
    > (fingers crossed).
    >
    > So I'm happy with what I've now got and don't intend (in the near future)
    > to be adding any more memory; particularly if it's greater than a 256MB
    > stick.
    >
    > So I've saved your previous posting for future reference and here's my
    > BIOS readings for academic interest.
    >
    > AGP Voltage: 1.5V
    > DDR Voltage: 2.5V
    > Vcore Voltage: Normal
    > CPU Host Clock: (Mhz): 133
    > ---
    > VCore: +1.728V
    > VTT: +1.184V
    > +3.300V: +3.264V
    > +5.000V: +4.865V
    > +12.000V: +12.224V
    > 5VSB +5.886V
    >
    > Thanks again for your help.
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon
  16. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >Your Vtt (memory termination voltage) at +1.184 V is low by more than 5%.
    >It is suppose to be ½ of the DDR Voltage (i.e. 1.25V). The Vtt on my Rev. 2
    >board is +1.248 V, which is low by 0.16%.
    >
    >
    That would explain a couple of blue screens I've had since I put the new
    stick in, one on startup and one on shutdown (didn't bother recording
    them, want to see if they become a regular occurrence first). Presumably
    that's when the greatest load is placed on the machine.

    Are those figures based solely on experience or do you have a reference
    you could share?

    >Too bad you didn't post the Vtt for the 512MB stick(s) when you tried them.
    >It most likely would have been lower than +1.184 V. This would definitely
    >point to a voltage regulation problem that needs to be fixed.
    >
    >
    Unfortunately, at the time I didn't know that sort of information would
    have been useful.

    >If you would have raised the DDR Voltage, with the 512MB stick(s) you've
    >tried, you probably would have been able to use it.
    >
    >
    I'd wondered if that might have been the case. I won't be looking for
    any extra memory but if some comes my way cheaply then I might
    experiment. Are there any risks of blowing components if the DDR voltage
    is increased?

    >If you know someone who is an electronics hobbyist and can obtain and solder
    >
    >that capacitor to your board, that would be the ultimate solution.
    >
    I'd like to see if those blue screens I mentioned become a frequent
    problem. If so, then I might consider it. This box is my main computer
    and I use it for my business, so I can't afford a long period of downtime.

    --

    Simon
  17. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    DDR Memory Power specifications say that Vtt (memory bus tracking
    termination voltage) is defined as ½ of the DDR reference voltage, which is
    2.5 Volts. If you don't believe me you can do a Google on "Vtt memory
    termination voltage" and read the Electrical Engineering specifications for
    DDR memory power requirements. I have also taken Electrical Engineering at
    university and I also have a degree in Computer Science.

    You should be able to safely increase your DDR Voltage, even up to the
    maximum of 2.8V, in the BIOS without damaging your memory modules. This
    voltage increase doesn't have any effect on any of the other components on
    your system board, just the memory bus. You currently have it set at 2.5V
    but that is not what your system board is currently delivering to your
    memory, my guess is that your memory is really getting about 2.37 Volts. I
    would try setting DDR Voltage to 2.7V and see if your Vtt is any closer to
    the preferred 1.25V. This should get you more stability.

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1094105026.8820.0@nnrp-t71-03.news.uk.clara.net...
    > Homer J. Simpson wrote:
    >
    >>Your Vtt (memory termination voltage) at +1.184 V is low by more than 5%.
    >>It is suppose to be ½ of the DDR Voltage (i.e. 1.25V). The Vtt on my Rev.
    >>2 board is +1.248 V, which is low by 0.16%.
    >>
    > That would explain a couple of blue screens I've had since I put the new
    > stick in, one on startup and one on shutdown (didn't bother recording
    > them, want to see if they become a regular occurrence first). Presumably
    > that's when the greatest load is placed on the machine.
    >
    > Are those figures based solely on experience or do you have a reference
    > you could share?
    >
    >>Too bad you didn't post the Vtt for the 512MB stick(s) when you tried
    >>them. It most likely would have been lower than +1.184 V. This would
    >>definitely point to a voltage regulation problem that needs to be fixed.
    >>
    > Unfortunately, at the time I didn't know that sort of information would
    > have been useful.
    >
    >>If you would have raised the DDR Voltage, with the 512MB stick(s) you've
    >>tried, you probably would have been able to use it.
    >>
    > I'd wondered if that might have been the case. I won't be looking for any
    > extra memory but if some comes my way cheaply then I might experiment.
    > Are there any risks of blowing components if the DDR voltage is increased?
    >>If you know someone who is an electronics hobbyist and can obtain and
    >>solder
    >>that capacitor to your board, that would be the ultimate solution.
    >>
    > I'd like to see if those blue screens I mentioned become a frequent
    > problem. If so, then I might consider it. This box is my main computer and
    > I use it for my business, so I can't afford a long period of downtime.
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon
  18. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >DDR Memory Power specifications say that Vtt (memory bus tracking
    >termination voltage) is defined as ½ of the DDR reference voltage, which is
    >2.5 Volts. If you don't believe me you can do a Google on "Vtt memory
    >termination voltage" and read the Electrical Engineering specifications for
    >DDR memory power requirements. I have also taken Electrical Engineering at
    >university and I also have a degree in Computer Science.
    >
    >
    Took your advice and googled on 'Vtt memory termination voltage' but
    couldn't find a page I understood. Most of the places I found were
    talking about various manufacturers products and required more
    background knowledge than I have. What little I could understand seemed
    to confirm what you're saying though.

    >You should be able to safely increase your DDR Voltage, even up to the
    >maximum of 2.8V, in the BIOS without damaging your memory modules. This
    >voltage increase doesn't have any effect on any of the other components on
    >your system board, just the memory bus. You currently have it set at 2.5V
    >but that is not what your system board is currently delivering to your
    >memory, my guess is that your memory is really getting about 2.37 Volts. I
    >would try setting DDR Voltage to 2.7V and see if your Vtt is any closer to
    >the preferred 1.25V. This should get you more stability.
    >
    >
    >

    Had another blue screen at startup yesterday, a Stop 4E,
    PFN_LIST_CORRUPT. Googling led me to -
    http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=291806
    which said "This behavior may occur if you have bad RAM.".

    I don't believe this to be the case, although I'll run a memtest86
    sometime, just to check. If I'm understanding everything correctly then
    my DDR voltage is close to the point of instability and as you suggest,
    increasing it should move my board away from this point.

    I plan to monitor the frequency of these BSODs and if they become too
    frequent to try increasing the DDR voltage and see if they go away.

    Your advice that this is unlikely to damage my memory is reassuring.

    --

    Simon Elliott
  19. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    I would expect that you are going to get a lot of memory errors or complete
    system freezeup or spontaneous reboot when you run memtest86. You cannot
    rely on the results from memtest86 when you are not supplying the correct
    power requirements to the memory modules. You need to test the memory on a
    known stable system board to determine if your memory modules are defective.

    The DDR Voltages in the BIOS, that are above the standard 2.5V, are there
    for the overclockers so that they can attempt to achieve system stability
    when running their memory modules faster than its original design
    specifications.

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1094193229.17009.0@eunomia.uk.clara.net...
    > Homer J. Simpson wrote:
    >
    >>DDR Memory Power specifications say that Vtt (memory bus tracking
    >>termination voltage) is defined as ½ of the DDR reference voltage, which
    >>is 2.5 Volts. If you don't believe me you can do a Google on "Vtt memory
    >>termination voltage" and read the Electrical Engineering specifications
    >>for DDR memory power requirements. I have also taken Electrical
    >>Engineering at university and I also have a degree in Computer Science.
    >>
    > Took your advice and googled on 'Vtt memory termination voltage' but
    > couldn't find a page I understood. Most of the places I found were talking
    > about various manufacturers products and required more background
    > knowledge than I have. What little I could understand seemed to confirm
    > what you're saying though.
    >
    >>You should be able to safely increase your DDR Voltage, even up to the
    >>maximum of 2.8V, in the BIOS without damaging your memory modules. This
    >>voltage increase doesn't have any effect on any of the other components on
    >>your system board, just the memory bus. You currently have it set at 2.5V
    >>but that is not what your system board is currently delivering to your
    >>memory, my guess is that your memory is really getting about 2.37 Volts.
    >>I would try setting DDR Voltage to 2.7V and see if your Vtt is any closer
    >>to the preferred 1.25V. This should get you more stability.
    >>
    >>
    >
    > Had another blue screen at startup yesterday, a Stop 4E, PFN_LIST_CORRUPT.
    > Googling led me to -
    > http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=291806
    > which said "This behavior may occur if you have bad RAM.".
    >
    > I don't believe this to be the case, although I'll run a memtest86
    > sometime, just to check. If I'm understanding everything correctly then my
    > DDR voltage is close to the point of instability and as you suggest,
    > increasing it should move my board away from this point.
    >
    > I plan to monitor the frequency of these BSODs and if they become too
    > frequent to try increasing the DDR voltage and see if they go away.
    >
    > Your advice that this is unlikely to damage my memory is reassuring.
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon Elliott
  20. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >I would expect that you are going to get a lot of memory errors or complete
    >system freezeup or spontaneous reboot when you run memtest86. You cannot
    >rely on the results from memtest86 when you are not supplying the correct
    >power requirements to the memory modules. You need to test the memory on a
    >known stable system board to determine if your memory modules are defective.
    >
    Thanks for the warning, makes sense. Details below, but I'm not
    confident I can consider this board stable yet.

    One thing puzzles me. Why do the problems seem to manifest mainly at
    startup, occasionally at shutdown but not when Windows is running
    normally? Almost always when the two initial Windows screens, the one
    with the progress bars (or the CHKDSK screen) have just ended. I can
    run the box on a full load (SETI screensaver) for several minutes, no
    problem. Burn CDs, no problem. Occasions I might have guessed problems
    would occur, but not so. Does the point at which the problem occurs tell
    us anything about the hardware in the machine, or anything about what
    Windows is doing as it starts?

    Think about what what I've just written, it's when a screen mode changes
    - low res to higher.

    It's late, I'm tired and I readily agree I could be talking rubbish. But
    aren't memory and an AGP graphic card on the same PCI bus? So might
    lowering the AGP voltage also have a positive effect? Do they share the
    same power line? The card is an Nvidia GeForce FX 5200, 128MB of memory.

    It's just a thought, so be gentle with me if I'm talking b******s.

    >The DDR Voltages in the BIOS, that are above the standard 2.5V, are there
    >for the overclockers so that they can attempt to achieve system stability
    >when running their memory modules faster than its original design
    >specifications.
    >
    Are significant gains possible? Aside from SETI it's rare I max out my
    CPU for any length of time. Occasional WAV or JPG editing needs it, but
    most of the time I'm just ticking over. What are these guys doing that
    they need the power? And are these systems reliable? Or is it just
    because they can? No problem with that, by doing so they're helping me
    as well. Just curious.

    BSODs more frequent today, various types, half a dozen in total - four
    just trying to start the box earlier this evening. So I increased the
    DDR voltage to 2.6, then 2.7 volts before they stopped. Forgot to record
    the Vtt value, will come back with that another time.

    Thank you for taking the time to help.

    --

    Simon
  21. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    The AGP bus and the DDR memory bus are both connected to th KT333
    Northbridge chip. The PCI bus is connected to the VT8233ACE Southbridge
    chip. So the answer to your question is no, the PCI bus is not on and not
    the same as the AGP or memory bus. Notice that the AGP and DDR memory buses
    are both connected to the same chip. The default AGP Voltage is 1.5V, you
    cannot lower it, you can only raise it to 1.8V maximum by 0.1V increments.

    When you say that an increase in video resolution seems to cause the
    problem, that would point to the video card drawing more current as the
    video resolution increases (more video memory on the graphics card being
    used) causing the voltage to drop to both the video card and the memory
    module(s). This would indicate that you really need to get that capacitor
    soldered onto your board to solve this voltage regulation problem.

    This motherboard can run the DDR memory synchronously at 266MHz (preferred)
    or asynchronously at 333MHz. When overclockers increase the FSB beyond the
    normal 266MHz this also increases the speed of the AGP bus (above 66MHz),
    memory bus (above 266MHz), and PCI bus (above 33MHz). When the buses are
    run beyond their original design specs the digital signals on the buses
    start to degrade or become deformed from the ideal square wave and the
    system is unable to tell the difference between a logical 0 and a logical 1.
    It is the voltage level that determines a logical 0 or a logical 1. If the
    digital signal on the memory bus transitions below the Vtt voltage then this
    is a logical zero, if the digital signal's voltage is in the Vtt voltage
    (1.25V) to DDR voltage (2.5V) range this is considered a logical one.
    Overclockers will increase the DDR Voltage to "strengthen" the digital
    signal on the memory bus. This is also the same reason for raising the
    VCore Voltage for the CPU when overclocking. Overclockers usually overclock
    because they can. The performance gains are usually noticable, otherwise
    they wouldn't be doing it. Overclocking success and stability/reliability
    are dependant upon the CPU model and the quality of RAM and good cooling of
    the CPU.

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1094253809.31201.0@nnrp-t71-02.news.clara.net...
    > Homer J. Simpson wrote:
    >
    >>I would expect that you are going to get a lot of memory errors or
    >>complete system freezeup or spontaneous reboot when you run memtest86.
    >>You cannot rely on the results from memtest86 when you are not supplying
    >>the correct power requirements to the memory modules. You need to test
    >>the memory on a known stable system board to determine if your memory
    >>modules are defective.
    >>
    > Thanks for the warning, makes sense. Details below, but I'm not confident
    > I can consider this board stable yet.
    >
    > One thing puzzles me. Why do the problems seem to manifest mainly at
    > startup, occasionally at shutdown but not when Windows is running
    > normally? Almost always when the two initial Windows screens, the one with
    > the progress bars (or the CHKDSK screen) have just ended. I can run the
    > box on a full load (SETI screensaver) for several minutes, no problem.
    > Burn CDs, no problem. Occasions I might have guessed problems would occur,
    > but not so. Does the point at which the problem occurs tell us anything
    > about the hardware in the machine, or anything about what Windows is doing
    > as it starts?
    >
    > Think about what what I've just written, it's when a screen mode changes -
    > low res to higher.
    >
    > It's late, I'm tired and I readily agree I could be talking rubbish. But
    > aren't memory and an AGP graphic card on the same PCI bus? So might
    > lowering the AGP voltage also have a positive effect? Do they share the
    > same power line? The card is an Nvidia GeForce FX 5200, 128MB of memory.
    >
    > It's just a thought, so be gentle with me if I'm talking b******s.
    >>The DDR Voltages in the BIOS, that are above the standard 2.5V, are there
    >>for the overclockers so that they can attempt to achieve system stability
    >>when running their memory modules faster than its original design
    >>specifications.
    >>
    > Are significant gains possible? Aside from SETI it's rare I max out my CPU
    > for any length of time. Occasional WAV or JPG editing needs it, but most
    > of the time I'm just ticking over. What are these guys doing that they
    > need the power? And are these systems reliable? Or is it just because they
    > can? No problem with that, by doing so they're helping me as well. Just
    > curious.
    >
    > BSODs more frequent today, various types, half a dozen in total - four
    > just trying to start the box earlier this evening. So I increased the DDR
    > voltage to 2.6, then 2.7 volts before they stopped. Forgot to record the
    > Vtt value, will come back with that another time.
    >
    > Thank you for taking the time to help.
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon
  22. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >The AGP bus and the DDR memory bus are both connected to th KT333
    >Northbridge chip. The PCI bus is connected to the VT8233ACE Southbridge
    >chip. So the answer to your question is no, the PCI bus is not on and not
    >the same as the AGP or memory bus. Notice that the AGP and DDR memory buses
    >are both connected to the same chip. The default AGP Voltage is 1.5V, you
    >cannot lower it, you can only raise it to 1.8V maximum by 0.1V increments.
    >
    >
    Please excuse my late night ramblings then.

    >When you say that an increase in video resolution seems to cause the
    >problem, that would point to the video card drawing more current as the
    >video resolution increases (more video memory on the graphics card being
    >used) causing the voltage to drop to both the video card and the memory
    >module(s).
    >
    I follow you.

    >This would indicate that you really need to get that capacitor
    >soldered onto your board to solve this voltage regulation problem.
    >
    >
    I would agree. I'm getting BSODs almost every time I start the box now.
    It's like an old car on a winter's morning. You've got to turn it over
    several times and eventually it will fire up. That's with DDR voltage maxed.

    >This motherboard can run the DDR memory synchronously at 266MHz (preferred)
    >or asynchronously at 333MHz. When overclockers increase the FSB beyond the
    >normal 266MHz this also increases the speed of the AGP bus (above 66MHz),
    >memory bus (above 266MHz), and PCI bus (above 33MHz). When the buses are
    >run beyond their original design specs the digital signals on the buses
    >start to degrade or become deformed from the ideal square wave and the
    >system is unable to tell the difference between a logical 0 and a logical 1.
    >It is the voltage level that determines a logical 0 or a logical 1. If the
    >digital signal on the memory bus transitions below the Vtt voltage then this
    >is a logical zero, if the digital signal's voltage is in the Vtt voltage
    >(1.25V) to DDR voltage (2.5V) range this is considered a logical one.
    >
    >
    I follow you.

    >Overclockers will increase the DDR Voltage to "strengthen" the digital
    >signal on the memory bus. This is also the same reason for raising the
    >VCore Voltage for the CPU when overclocking. Overclockers usually overclock
    >because they can. The performance gains are usually noticable, otherwise
    >they wouldn't be doing it. Overclocking success and stability/reliability
    >are dependant upon the CPU model and the quality of RAM and good cooling of
    >the CPU.
    >
    >
    That bothers me. I bought this board because, at Rev 1.2, I thought
    "That's got to be fairly stable. They'll have ironed out the bugs from
    the first version.". I don't want to overclock, all I want is a stable
    board that delivers what it promises. And at the moment this isn't.
    Gigabyte boards were ok by me, until recent experience. How do I know
    the next board I buy is going to be reliable? I guess I'm going to have
    to research the next purchase, rather than buy on whim.


    --

    Simon
  23. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    It's a good idea to check the news groups before buying. You will get an
    idea of what problems people are having with particular models. Or you can
    post your questions or requests for an opinion on a particular board model
    before you purchase, especially if the board is obsolete or f it is very
    new.

    "Simon Elliott" <simon@deleteelliott.clara.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:1094327106.17874.0@eunomia.uk.clara.net...
    > Homer J. Simpson wrote:
    >
    >>The AGP bus and the DDR memory bus are both connected to th KT333
    >>Northbridge chip. The PCI bus is connected to the VT8233ACE Southbridge
    >>chip. So the answer to your question is no, the PCI bus is not on and not
    >>the same as the AGP or memory bus. Notice that the AGP and DDR memory
    >>buses are both connected to the same chip. The default AGP Voltage is
    >>1.5V, you cannot lower it, you can only raise it to 1.8V maximum by 0.1V
    >>increments.
    >>
    > Please excuse my late night ramblings then.
    >
    >>When you say that an increase in video resolution seems to cause the
    >>problem, that would point to the video card drawing more current as the
    >>video resolution increases (more video memory on the graphics card being
    >>used) causing the voltage to drop to both the video card and the memory
    >>module(s).
    >>
    > I follow you.
    >
    >>This would indicate that you really need to get that capacitor soldered
    >>onto your board to solve this voltage regulation problem.
    >>
    > I would agree. I'm getting BSODs almost every time I start the box now.
    > It's like an old car on a winter's morning. You've got to turn it over
    > several times and eventually it will fire up. That's with DDR voltage
    > maxed.
    >
    >>This motherboard can run the DDR memory synchronously at 266MHz
    >>(preferred) or asynchronously at 333MHz. When overclockers increase the
    >>FSB beyond the normal 266MHz this also increases the speed of the AGP bus
    >>(above 66MHz), memory bus (above 266MHz), and PCI bus (above 33MHz). When
    >>the buses are run beyond their original design specs the digital signals
    >>on the buses start to degrade or become deformed from the ideal square
    >>wave and the system is unable to tell the difference between a logical 0
    >>and a logical 1. It is the voltage level that determines a logical 0 or a
    >>logical 1. If the digital signal on the memory bus transitions below the
    >>Vtt voltage then this is a logical zero, if the digital signal's voltage
    >>is in the Vtt voltage (1.25V) to DDR voltage (2.5V) range this is
    >>considered a logical one.
    > I follow you.
    >
    >>Overclockers will increase the DDR Voltage to "strengthen" the digital
    >>signal on the memory bus. This is also the same reason for raising the
    >>VCore Voltage for the CPU when overclocking. Overclockers usually
    >>overclock because they can. The performance gains are usually noticable,
    >>otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. Overclocking success and
    >>stability/reliability are dependant upon the CPU model and the quality of
    >>RAM and good cooling of the CPU.
    >>
    > That bothers me. I bought this board because, at Rev 1.2, I thought
    > "That's got to be fairly stable. They'll have ironed out the bugs from the
    > first version.". I don't want to overclock, all I want is a stable board
    > that delivers what it promises. And at the moment this isn't. Gigabyte
    > boards were ok by me, until recent experience. How do I know the next
    > board I buy is going to be reliable? I guess I'm going to have to research
    > the next purchase, rather than buy on whim.
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > Simon
  24. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.gigabyte (More info?)

    Homer J. Simpson wrote:

    >It's a good idea to check the news groups before buying. You will get an
    >idea of what problems people are having with particular models. Or you can
    >post your questions or requests for an opinion on a particular board model
    >before you purchase, especially if the board is obsolete or f it is very
    >new.
    >
    >
    Yeah, sorry, another late night rant on my part. Apologies

    You're quite right, shop around and ask advice before buying.

    BTW, two boots today and no BSODs.

    --

    Simon
Ask a new question

Read More

Gigabyte Memory Motherboards